I think I am doing okay

bluenose1

atush wrote: »

Have you considered a low carb or even keto diet to help control your type 2? Some doing this even come out of type 2.

Totally off topic but have you seen the infographic of how much teaspoons of sugar is in food that is sometimes classed as healthy. I never knew there was 9 teaspoons of sugar in a portion of masked potatoes and similar in rice.
This was written by a Doctor from Southport.
https://phcuk.org/sugar/

Sorry OP for going off topic.

worried_jim

bluenose1 wrote: »

Totally off topic but have you seen the infographic of how much teaspoons of sugar is in food that is sometimes classed as healthy. I never knew there was 9 teaspoons of sugar in a portion of masked potatoes and similar in rice.
This was written by a Doctor from Southport.
https://phcuk.org/sugar/

Sorry OP for going off topic.

You are right! A baked potato can contain more sugar than a can of Coke.

itwasntme001

Oliver1191 wrote: »

I mean this politely, but you're doing terribly.

Firstly, my question to you would be: how much do you need for lean FIRE?

My lean FIRE is 1k a month. Using the 4% withdrawal rate, that means i need at least 300k total pot. At 46, you're nowehere near this.

You've got something, which is good, but you need to increase your investment rate asap.

I mean this politely but your post is just absurd.


First of all the OP is not aiming for early retirement. Second, why do you use the "4% rule" for someone retiring at 46? Makes no sense at all. At 46 with another 40 years of life expected, the 4% rule will likely fail. 4% rule should only be used for someone retiring at the traditional age of 65 or so and has about 20 years left of expected life. Even then i would still try to be a bit conservative with that.



It astounds me how so many use the 4% rule as early retirees. They are making a very big mistake.

Oliver1191

My issue here is that people assume you will work full time until 68 and always get pay rises.

There's more to life than working until you drop. I'm not sure anyone can guarantee pay rises for the rest of their working lives either.

Can you cut back more? Start a side hustle? Take in a lodger?

Equally, you could prepare to work part-time in your 50s...it might keep you going for longer, allow you to enjoy life & give time for your investments to grow.

Oliver1191

I mean this politely but your post is just absurd.


First of all the OP is not aiming for early retirement. Second, why do you use the "4% rule" for someone retiring at 46? Makes no sense at all. At 46 with another 40 years of life expected, the 4% rule will likely fail. 4% rule should only be used for someone retiring at the traditional age of 65 or so and has about 20 years left of expected life. Even then i would still try to be a bit conservative with that.



It astounds me how so many use the 4% rule as early retirees. They are making a very big mistake.

Nonsense.

Firstly, it's a myrh to suggest that lean FIRE or any type of FIRE means stopping work. There is plenty written on the subject where people actively continue working.

Comparing the value of your pot to your lean FIRE numbers would be really good for the op in evaluating and determining next steps.

If, at 46, you are not planning for the option to retire, you've simply missed a trick.

Where are you getting your information on the 4% rule from? It's applicable at any age. Read mr money mustach - it will help your thinking in this matter.

atush

people actively continue working.

This means they arent retired. So your Fire changes to FI.

itwasntme001

Oliver1191 wrote: »

Nonsense.

Firstly, it's a myrh to suggest that lean FIRE or any type of FIRE means stopping work. There is plenty written on the subject where people actively continue working.

Comparing the value of your pot to your lean FIRE numbers would be really good for the op in evaluating and determining next steps.

If, at 46, you are not planning for the option to retire, you've simply missed a trick.

Where are you getting your information on the 4% rule from? It's applicable at any age. Read mr money mustach - it will help your thinking in this matter.

Again a completely absurd post and i mean that politely of course


You mention FIRE but then mention actively working? Completely contradictory!


I ran the numbers myself regarding the 4% rule - It only really works at normal retirement ages. With say a 40 year retirement duration, there is a significant chance you will run out of money before you die. No way would or should anyone risk that for the sake of retiring early. Yes i heard of mr money moustache - don't think much of him and i am pretty sure he has not run the numbers himself (which is surprising given i believe he is from a tech background). He is just a symbol of this FIRE movement that so many people seemed to have blindly follow and assume the 4% rule is some sort of magical gift from the gods setting them free from work forever.


Oh how wrong they all are!

worried_jim

Oliver1191 wrote: »

My issue here is that people assume you will work full time until 68 and always get pay rises.

There's more to life than working until you drop. I'm not sure anyone can guarantee pay rises for the rest of their working lives either.

Can you cut back more? Start a side hustle? Take in a lodger?

Equally, you could prepare to work part-time in your 50s...it might keep you going for longer, allow you to enjoy life & give time for your investments to grow.

I had a lodger for 13 years up to April last year, this is the first time that I have had my home to myself. If the right person came along I probably would again but right now not.

I now (since May) work two days a week from home which is nice and relaxing but you are right about the possibility of having to do less in the future perhaps.

Oliver1191

Again a completely absurd post and i mean that politely of course!


You mention FIRE but then mention actively working? Completely contradictory!


I ran the numbers myself regarding the 4% rule - It only really works at normal retirement ages. With say a 40 year retirement duration, there is a significant chance you will run out of money before you die. No way would or should anyone risk that for the sake of retiring early. Yes i heard of mr money moustache - don't think much of him and i am pretty sure he has not run the numbers himself (which is surprising given i believe he is from a tech background). He is just a symbol of this FIRE movement that so many people seemed to have blindly follow and assume the 4% rule is some sort of magical gift from the gods setting them free from work forever.


Oh how wrong they all are!

Ha ha.

You're wrong.

The idea of working, yet having achieved FIRE is not contradictory. Rather it is complementary. You can choose how to spend your time, which can include work you enjoy or volunteering.

Hearing about something is not enough to form a robust view.

What is your evidence for proposing that mmm is wrong?

To help get you started, try reading this:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2018/11/29/how-to-retire-forever-on-a-fixed-chunk-of-money/

itwasntme001

Oliver1191 wrote: »

Ha ha.

You're wrong.

The idea of working, yet having achieved FIRE is not contradictory. Rather it is complementary. You can choose how to spend your time, which can include work you enjoy or volunteering.

Hearing about something is not enough to form a robust view.

What is your evidence for proposing that mmm is wrong?

To help get you started, try reading this:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2018/11/29/how-to-retire-forever-on-a-fixed-chunk-of-money/

Using historical data of US stock returns, inflation etc i ran simulations and found:

40 year retirement span:
5% swr: 40% chance of running out of money before death
4% swr: 9% chance of running out of money before death
3% swr: 0% chance of running out of money before death

50 year retirement span:
5% swr: 40% chance of running out of money before death
4% swr: 11% chance of running out of money before death
3% swr: 0% chance of running out of money before death

So there is roughly a 10% chance the 4% rule wont work for you if you have a 40 or 50 year retirement span. Can you say comfortably at age 36 or 46 that the 4% rule will work? At a 10% failure rate i don't think that is comfortable at all. And with such a steep increase in failure rate at the 5% swr, it does not take much of extra spending over the years (say for medical expenses etc) to cause complete destruction to your plans. Not to mention the risk of you happening to retire at the wrong time i.e. steep drop in investment value in the early years - sequence of returns risk.

FIRE by definition means no work. What you are suggesting is people don't have to work but they can do if they so choose to. this blurs the line between FIRE and not-FIRE. If they are working because they need to bridge the gap to get to retirement they were never FIRE in the first place.

You have proven that people like yourself blindly follow others like MMM and get it oh so wrong. What MMM has written in his article does not look into the details that i have and so misses quite dangerously some key risks in assuming one can retire early.